Curtis P-40 or Macchi Mc.202

Discussion in 'Polls' started by Daviducus2, Sep 9, 2009.

  1. Daviducus2

    Daviducus2 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    In a face off between the two at low to medium altitude, which would you prefer and why?
     
  2. Bernhart

    Bernhart <b>2012 Forum Fantasy Football Champion</ b>

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    432
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    mental health nurse
    Location:
    Canada
    macchi was a match for spits so would go with it. course i have va weak spot for the macchis
     
  3. pbfoot

    pbfoot Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,636
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    niagara falls
    The P40 was right at home in the lower realms and I would think in head to head held the advantage in combats
     
  4. B-17engineer

    B-17engineer Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    14,953
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    model builder
    Location:
    Revis Island.
    With PB, I think the P-40 was better and more rugged than the Mc. 202.
     
  5. vikingBerserker

    vikingBerserker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    24,072
    Likes Received:
    655
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Korporate Kontrolleur
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I was just reading in Combat Aircraft of World War II and it mentions the Mc 202 as

    "..achieving complete superiority over the Hurricane and P-40"

    This actually surprises me due to the lite armament the Mc 202 carried.

    I'm kinda leaning towards the Mc 202.
     
  6. 109ROAMING

    109ROAMING Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    Messages:
    5,999
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    New Zealand
    P-40 for looks alone :lol:
     
  7. Marcogrifo

    Marcogrifo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Genoa, Italy
    C.202, despite the weak armament :)

    Cheers
     
  8. DAVIDICUS

    DAVIDICUS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Were there variants of the Macchi Mc.202 that had 20mm cannons?
     
  9. Vincenzo

    Vincenzo Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,281
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    none
    Location:
    Lazio
    if i remember right only a prototype
     
  10. timshatz

    timshatz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    MGR
    Location:
    Phila, Pa
    P40. Better armament. Other than that, the Macchi probably has it for speed and climb, but it would be close in flat out speed.
     
  11. Glider

    Glider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2005
    Messages:
    6,160
    Likes Received:
    128
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Consellor
    Location:
    Lincolnshire
    The 202 for me. It had agility, acceleration, climb and in a straight line I don't think there was much in it. No question the P40 was better armed and an excellent GA aircraft but in a dogfight, the 202 has my vote.
     
  12. riacrato

    riacrato Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Project Manager in FADEC industrialization
    But 202s armament is really shitty. I mean in a "what were they thinking" kind of way. I don't really get it. It looks as if they could've easily fitted 12.7mm guns instead of rifle calibre mgs in the wings. Or at least fit 4-6 rifle calibre mgs.
     
  13. Vincenzo

    Vincenzo Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,281
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    none
    Location:
    Lazio
    commonly no mg in the wing, they are only optional since a block (i don't remember what) and i think very rare in operation. the two italian .50 are not the best and the good but i think enough for shoot down a P-40
     
  14. billswagger

    billswagger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    #14 billswagger, Feb 10, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2010
    .
     
  15. billswagger

    billswagger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2009
    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    The P-40 could out turn the Macchi 202 and 205s but not the lighter 200s. I'm not making a power measurement, just simply looking at wing loading although sustained performance at altitude (20k ft +) probably went to the Macchi.
    Macchi 205s had similar wing loading as a moderately loaded P-47 if that gives you any indication.

    The Macchi was a faster plane in level flight and had much better climb characteristics. In the time it takes a P-40 to reach 6000m the Macchi could climb to 8000m. So the high altitude fight would be best avoided in a P-40, where the low altitude fight would be best avoided in the Macchi.
    In comparisons at medium altitudes, the 205s probably shared similar zoom performance as the late P-40s (K-N) but roll performance and turn would've underperformed by comparison. The 202s were not far off, but the P-40 would still own it in turns by a small margin.

    The reason i go with the P-40 is the armament of 6 50 calibers over a couple bredas. The 205 had more firepower but was probably better suited for attacking bombers from the looks of things. It simply was not as maneuverable, although faster, as the 202s.


    Bill
     
  16. Saetta66

    Saetta66 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2010
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Occupation:
    Attorney at law
    Location:
    Napoli, Italia
    The first series were only armed with 2 × 0.50 inch Breda-SAFAT guns in the nose. Starting from Series VI armament was increased with 2 × 0.303 inch (7,7 mm) Breda-SAFAT guns in the wings.
    Starting from Series XI underwing hardpoints were added to carry either bombs or drop tanks.
    An unknown series (or a prototype ?) had 2 × 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons in underwing gondolas.
     
  17. dennis420b

    dennis420b Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Occupation:
    HVAC tech.
    Location:
    Ironton, Missouri
    The MC-202, despite having the same problem as all the Italian fighter's, those pitiful SAFAT 12.7mm's. But look at the 202, shes a sports car. Fast, agile, just sexy to look at. It has style.
     
Loading...

Share This Page